Come on Math wizards 48÷2(9+3) = ??? - Page 6 - GoFuckYourself.com

AsianDivaGirlsWebDude · 04-30-2011, 03:09 PM

I like Robot Chicken...FTW!!!

ADG

roly · 04-30-2011, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarChild

I agree with you that 1999 is a bit too old. Fortunately, somebody asked that very same PHD this EXACT question in this day and age. Here is how he answered it:

So there you have it folks. A PHD and professor of mathematics says, in 2011 says it's a poorly written equation that, and I quote him here directly, "The left to right approach yielding 288 is the only interpretation that fits the usual set of rules; but it is so easy to
misread that I'd avoid it".

PHD Math > everyone here. Case closed.

good find

eroticsexxx · 04-30-2011, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarChild

I agree with you that 1999 is a bit too old. Fortunately, somebody asked that very same PHD this EXACT question in this day and age. Here is how he answered it:

So there you have it folks. A PHD and professor of mathematics says, in 2011 says it's a poorly written equation that, and I quote him here directly, "The left to right approach yielding 288 is the only interpretation that fits the usual set of rules; but it is so easy to
misread that I'd avoid it".

PHD Math > everyone here. Case closed.

As far as I can see, that is a quote from the 1999 conversation that someone else referenced in a recent 2011 thread.

I have a few things to do, but I'll reference the science journals I have access to.

eroticsexxx · 04-30-2011, 05:43 PM

Finding a few things.

The most compelling involves the fact that 48÷2(9+3) = 48÷(2*9+2*3) due to distribution of the implied multiplication variable.

Interesting.

WarChild · 04-30-2011, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eroticsexxx

Finding a few things.

The most compelling involves the fact that 48÷2(9+3) = 48÷(2*9+2*3) due to distribution of the implied multiplication variable.

Interesting.

Distribution is Multiplication. If you distribute the 2 in to the parenthesis before you solve what's inside the parenthesis, you've violated the standard order of operations. You have to do what's inside the Parenthesis first.

Remember, the distributive property applies to multiplying by a polynomial. 9+3 is not a polynomial.

eroticsexxx · 04-30-2011, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarChild

Distribution is Multiplication. If you distribute the 2 in to the parenthesis before you solve what's inside the parenthesis, you've violated the standard order of operations. You have to do what's inside the Parenthesis first.

Remember, the distributive property applies to multiplying by a polynomial. 9+3 is not a polynomial.

Figured that you would chime in, due to your lack of comprehension of my example.

I said that 48÷2(9+3) = 48÷(2*9+2*3), implying that the VALUES of such are equal.

What I did NOT state is that such is the way that the original equation is calculated.

Let's see who else is quick to jump on your bandwagon in an attempt to correct what I did NOT state.

By the way, the correct answer is still 2

WarChild · 04-30-2011, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eroticsexxx

Figured that you would chime in, due to your lack of comprehension of my example.

I said that 48÷2(9+3) = 48÷(2*9+2*3), implying that the VALUES of such are equal.

What I did NOT state is that such is the way that the original equation is calculated.

Let's see who else is quick to jump on your bandwagon in an attempt to correct what I did NOT state.

By the way, the correct answer is still 2

Interestingly enough, at least one professor seems to disagree with you. That's good enough for me.

Vjo · 04-30-2011, 06:10 PM

I just want to know who the 14 people are who like "robot chicken" whatever that is.

But good discussion. It is good to see folks argue their convictions.

moeloubani · 04-30-2011, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eroticsexxx

Figured that you would chime in, due to your lack of comprehension of my example.

I said that 48÷2(9+3) = 48÷(2*9+2*3), implying that the VALUES of such are equal.

What I did NOT state is that such is the way that the original equation is calculated.

Let's see who else is quick to jump on your bandwagon in an attempt to correct what I did NOT state.

By the way, the correct answer is still 2

48÷2(9+3) != 48÷(2*9+2*3)

You can't just move a bracket as you see fit. You have to follow the order of operations. There are rules for situations like this and if you stick to the rules and not follow some weird rule that you guys seem to know but no one seems to be able to prove then you come up with 288.

Konda · 04-30-2011, 06:13 PM

It has been mentioned many times that this is a TROLL thread, and yet people still argue over this? Are GFY-ers really this stupid??? There is no point arguing over a something that does not have a correct answer, because it's written incorrectly. People really don't have anything better to do than arguing in a Troll thread?!?

Si · 04-30-2011, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konda

It has been mentioned many times that this is a TROLL thread, and yet people still argue over this? Are GFY-ers really this stupid??? There is no point arguing over a something that does not have a correct answer, because it's written incorrectly. People really don't have anything better to do than arguing in a Troll thread?!?

eroticsexxx · 04-30-2011, 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moeloubani

48÷2(9+3) != 48÷(2*9+2*3)

You can't just move a bracket as you see fit. You have to follow the order of operations. There are rules for situations like this and if you stick to the rules and not follow some weird rule that you guys seem to know but no one seems to be able to prove then you come up with 288.

My response to Warchild (guess that you were too busy posting to read my repsonse to him). See below.

Quote:

Originally Posted by eroticsexxx

Figured that you would chime in, due to your lack of comprehension of my example.

I said that 48÷2(9+3) = 48÷(2*9+2*3), implying that the VALUES of such are equal.

What I did NOT state is that such is the way that the original equation is calculated.

Let's see who else is quick to jump on your bandwagon in an attempt to correct what I did NOT state.

By the way, the correct answer is still 2

WarChild · 04-30-2011, 08:47 PM

Since I'ver already provided multiple links pointing to the Standard Order of Operations without any of them making any mention of implicit multiplication outranking explicit multiplication, would somebody from the other camp please post some links documenting the standard that requires otherwise? If it's an agreed upon standard it must be pretty easy to find somewhere? I wasn't able to find anything conclusive myself. Perhaps you can educate me. I'm open to having my mind changed.

In the meantime consider this.

48÷2(9+3) = 48 x ½(9+3)
48 x ½(9+3) = 288

GatorB · 04-30-2011, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moeloubani

I also studied mathematics at a university level and the answer is actually 288.

Unless you decide you want to change BEDMAS around and go right to left or unless you want to argue that 2(9+3) isn't equal to 2(12) in which case the bracket can be dropped and made into 2*12.

48/2*12 = 288

Don't know why you would do 2(9+3) first.

Because we aren't retarded like you. The equation is NOT 48/2*12. it's not written out that way.

It's MORE than obvious (9+3)=12. Shouldn't be ANY argument in that. So 2(9+3)= 2(12) which = 2*12 which = 24. So take the first number which is 48 and divide that by the answer of 2*12 which is 24 and you get 2. This isn't hard.

moeloubani · 04-30-2011, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GatorB

Because we aren't retarded like you. The equation is NOT 48/2*12. it's not written out that way.

It's MORE than obvious (9+3)=12. Shouldn't be ANY argument in that. So 2(9+3)= 2(12) which = 2*12 which = 24. So take the first number which is 48 and divide that by the answer of 2*12 which is 24 and you get 2. This isn't hard.

Love how the people who are obviously wrong come out with the insults as if it helps their position.

Don't know why you are doing 2*12 before 48/2 since by doing that you are violating the normal order of operations.

You're right, this isn't hard. So I don't know why people keep coming up with 2 when the answer is 288.

If you know of a rule that makes 2(9+3) take precedence in the order of operations over something else then speak up and show some proof.

But you know of no such rule because it doesn't exist. That said, the normal order of operations should be followed and when it is from left to right we get 48/2 = 24 and then 24(9+3) which is 288.

Go ahead Gator B, this isn't hard right? All you people saying you know of this magical rule can surely show me somewhere where this rule is published as a rule in mathematics? It isn't. Did you guys want me to show you some published rules about BEDMAS (or PEMDAS)??

2(3) is no different a number than 2 * 3. And 2(9+3) is no different a number than 2 * 12.

Go ahead - prove me wrong. I would love to be proven wrong because I am so damn sick of being right about everything. I am always right and I hate it so I invite you to show me the rule that says one kind of multiplication is different than another when it comes to order of operations.

Until then please keep the insults to yourself lest you make a fool of yourself insulting the wrong person like me, Mr. Right.

I am always right. Please prove me wrong, any published rule will do.

I also go by Duke Opposite of Left

Agent 488 · 04-30-2011, 11:39 PM

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/48293

cooldude7 · 05-01-2011, 01:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vjo

I just want to know who the 14 people are who like "robot chicken" whatever that is.

But good discussion. It is good to see folks argue their convictions.

i am one of them, now find other 13

Deputy Chief Command · 05-01-2011, 01:22 AM

troll thread is troll worthy

WarChild · 05-01-2011, 04:24 PM

So not one link to the ruling that decreed implicit multiplication to have priority over explicit multiplication? If it really is a standard, it should be readily available?

View Poll Results: 48÷2(9+3) = ????
288	46	30.46%
2	91	60.26%
i like robot chicken	14	9.27%
Voters: 151. You may not vote on this poll

04-30-2011, 03:09 PM	#251
AsianDivaGirlsWebDude Purveyor, Fine Asian Porn Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: San Francisco Bay Area Posts: 38,323	I like Robot Chicken...FTW!!! ADG __________________ Asian Diva Girls - Exclusive Photos and Videos Asian Diva Girls Affiliate Program (50% ccBill Revshare)

04-30-2011, 05:43 PM	#254
eroticsexxx Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nassau, Bahamas Posts: 3,133	Finding a few things. The most compelling involves the fact that 48÷2(9+3) = 48÷(29+23) due to distribution of the implied multiplication variable. Interesting. __________________

04-30-2011, 06:10 PM	#258
Vjo So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Happy 4th of July :) Posts: 6,082	I just want to know who the 14 people are who like "robot chicken" whatever that is. But good discussion. It is good to see folks argue their convictions. Last edited by Vjo; 04-30-2011 at 06:23 PM..

04-30-2011, 08:47 PM	#263
WarChild Let slip the dogs of war. Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Bermuda Posts: 17,263	Since I'ver already provided multiple links pointing to the Standard Order of Operations without any of them making any mention of implicit multiplication outranking explicit multiplication, would somebody from the other camp please post some links documenting the standard that requires otherwise? If it's an agreed upon standard it must be pretty easy to find somewhere? I wasn't able to find anything conclusive myself. Perhaps you can educate me. I'm open to having my mind changed. In the meantime consider this. 48÷2(9+3) = 48 x ½(9+3) 48 x ½(9+3) = 288 __________________ .

04-30-2011, 06:13 PM	#260
Konda ... Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 2,280	It has been mentioned many times that this is a TROLL thread, and yet people still argue over this? Are GFY-ers really this stupid??? There is no point arguing over a something that does not have a correct answer, because it's written incorrectly. People really don't have anything better to do than arguing in a Troll thread?!?

04-30-2011, 11:39 PM	#266
Agent 488 Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 22,511	http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/48293

05-01-2011, 01:22 AM	#268
Deputy Chief Command Deputy Chief Command Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 4,482	troll thread is troll worthy __________________

05-01-2011, 04:24 PM	#269
WarChild Let slip the dogs of war. Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Bermuda Posts: 17,263	So not one link to the ruling that decreed implicit multiplication to have priority over explicit multiplication? If it really is a standard, it should be readily available? __________________ .